Now I am not a Patriot fan, I'm probably the farthest thing from a Patriot fan. However, I would agree you could make a good argument for placing they Dynasty tag on them.
The question is what is the main reason for all of their Super Bowl wins. I think Brady gets to much of the credit for the rings. I would rank them in this order:
1) Bill Belichick - This guy is one of the greatest coachs of all time. And I think his great gameplans are the biggest reason they were able to beat the Colts and make it to the Super Bowl in the past.
2) Adam Vinatieri - If it wasn't for his foot I don't think they woud have made it to the big game nearly as ofton let alone win it.
3) Their dominat defense - (the #2 reason beind Belichick they wer able to beat the Colts)
4) Then I think you can throw Tom Brady into the conversation.
What do you think?
2007-02-10 09:40:06 · 7 answers · asked by BAN 2 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
i think all of these answers are wrong
when they won all their superbowls one thing was constant and that was the coaching staff. When Charlie Weis left for Notre Dame, Romeo Crennel for the Browns, and Eric Mangini left for the Jets the Patriots havent been back to the Super Bowl. Weis and Crennel left 2 years ago and Mangini left last year. I think Belichik is only as good as his assistants make him look.
2007-02-10 10:18:22 · answer #1 · answered by Eric D 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not taking anything away from Tom Brady, but without Belichick, he is pretty much nothing. Belichick is a genius and of course, a little bit of luck wouldn't hurt. Also, it was Bledsoe who took them to the first SB. Besides, Patriots played the Packers in the SB before already, hence, the team was already built. Reasons for all Super Bowl wins:
1. Belichick
2. Defense
3. O-line
4. Adam Vinatieri
5. Luck
3 Super Bowls won by a field goal.
2007-02-10 09:55:30 · answer #2 · answered by c00kies 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you can't win without both. The fact is, Belichick is the best coach in the game ring now. He can break down teams like no body's business. But, you need a solid QB to win games for you. Brady is far and beyong solid. That, added with the fact that Belichick wins with a team that most coaches couldn't win with, and you get the New England Patriots.
2007-02-10 11:58:28 · answer #3 · answered by wsysummer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
but isnt it interesting the patriots started winning when brady took over, and havent looked back since? belichick was on his way to being fired that season. Granted, many a great coach gets fired because thats just the way the profession is, but in lieu of any other "objective" evidence (i think all your comments were subjective, not necessarily untrue, but debatable...) you have to consider exactly what happened when they went from losing to winning.
this is lame, but in the end, i think everyone gets credit. maybe bledsoe was just that bad...certainly brady's success is dependent upon his coaches, and perhaps even moreso...a coach's success depends on his players.
and im definitely no pats fan either.
2007-02-10 09:51:08 · answer #4 · answered by Maxwell L 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Brady is above Belichick. Ask yourself this, where was Belichick in Cleveland? Yeah that's right he has a history we can compare him to. Hmm what 8 years there I believe and NO DIVISION TITLES. Oh must be just because it was Cleveland right? Oh and where was the "genius" when it was Bledsoe leading the team?
2007-02-10 09:47:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
IT IS BRADY. BILICHECK IS A GREAT COACH BUT IF U DO NOT HAVE A GREAT PLAYER TO PUT A GREAT COACHS PLAN INTO EFFECT. NOTHIN AGAINST BILICHECK HE IS A GREAT COACH BUT IT TAKES A GREAT PLAYER TO PUT A GREAT COACHS PLN INTO EFFECT.
2007-02-10 13:23:07 · answer #6 · answered by osu_fan_82 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
stfu jealous b-itch. i enjoyed your mom last night.
2007-02-10 10:16:15 · answer #7 · answered by seein butts 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋